This is not to claim any credit, but the fact is that it was Nagaland Pradesh Congress Committee which initiated “talks without pre-conditions” in the later part of 1990. After long persuasion, Late Rajiv Gandhi, former Prime Minister of India and President, AICC, assured to talk without pre-conditions on 19th May 1991 at Dimapur Local Ground in a public meeting. Unfortunately, on the following third day (21st May 1991), he was assassinated at Purdumpur in the most dastardly act. It took NPCC and the Congress Government five long years to win the heart of Late P. V. Narasimha Rao, former Prime Minister and President, AICC, to offer “talks with no conditions” which he offered at Dimapur Stadium in front of a public gathering of over two and half lakh people. Talks with no conditions did not come free; we have paid a heavy price. Because of the conditions, we have suffered divisions, lost lives, aged, health and wealth.
After thirteen years of negotiations between GOI and NSCN (IM) at the enormous expense of the public of Nagaland, now the truth is that GOI has changed their offer from “talks with no conditions” to “Sovereignty and Territorial rearrangement are not negotiable”. There is some structural change in the conditions from the original political aspirations of Nagaland. In my assessment, factors responsible to these conditions have been contributed by the fractured mandate in the nation and secondly, divisions in amongst the Nagas. I think, even if the demand is given to the Nagas, which faction should rule would lead to the first war to the finish. And the most important factor is lack of consensus within and with neighbours. Further, no leader or political party or faction has authority to amend the Plebiscite resolution except the public.
The Voluntary Plebiscite conducted by NNC on 16th May, 1951, was a bold decision. We owe all that we have today to the Plebiscite resolution and the torch bearers of the Plebiscite who have sacrificed their precious lives, blood, tears, health and wealth. We are indeed most grateful to Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru for taking the bold decision to grant statehood to Nagaland, despite its small population of 3.5 Lakhs and area of land. I think he has single mindedly taken the risk. If the Nagaland People’s Convention and Nehru were not there, we may continue to be part of Assam even today. However, the 16 Point Agreement of 1960 is short of complete solution as Nagas outside Nagaland were left out. Since we have struggled together; part solution is no solution, it needs an inclusive solution.
Whether the concept of the Plebiscite resolution of 1951 is still maintainable in the context of the 21st century is the question drumming to all Nagaland People. In the beginning, the Plebiscite was the source of strength for NNC and FGN. Today, all the factions claim Plebiscite and run multi-govts fighting over domains with objective to tax the public. There is no mercy upon the public. There is no development that is not cut. It is not possible for the public to continue living under multi-govts. Naga National Workers as well as GOI understand the plight of the public. They are doing it deliberately with the expectation that the public will rise to the occasion with its Proposal for solution. In the present situation, Nagaland State’s subjects’ arms are twisted and our economy is being squeezed to the last drops.
In my personal view, it is time we take appropriate view and take forward the people with the advancement. In today’s world, the concept of ‘independent nation’ has changed not only in dimension but has transformed into a global economy playground. Boundaries are a mere visa on arrival. The concept of ‘independent’ is no more because we cannot live in isolation as we are all interdependent. We are experiencing new ideas of economic blockade. It causes food shortage, stops development, escalates prices, encourages black markets and affects the growth of economy. We all know; the fact is that we are interdependent and what we need is peaceful coexistence. When we are conscious to neighbour’s welfare, we can expect reciprocation. Doing it silently is much deeper and sweeter. In the olden days, people felt shy to claim credit. But today, people claim credits shamelessly. Claiming credit kills the credit. Let us not make a habit of claiming credit but let us appreciate the truth. Paying thanks and appreciation in the form of news letter only happens in Nagaland. If anyone feels happy because of such news letter, they are can be only considered as shameless and moral less by intellectual people.
In my assessment and perception, Nagas are united in the demand for a Sovereign Naga Nation and have expressed this. FNR has given some light to peace amongst the factions. Now the truth is that negotiation has come to a stalemate. We all know there has been a call from all top leaders for intervention of the public. It is time the public intervenes.
In this situation, our common objective is to secure a negotiated settlement to the Indo-Naga and Myanmar–Naga Political Problem. From the beginning, Naga leaders have chosen Non-Violence as the path to achieve the noble political goals. In view of the policy, we have come across seven historical agreements namely: 1947 9 Point Agreement (Sir Hyder Ali), 1960 16 Point Agreement, 1964 Ceasefire, 1972 Revolutionary Govt. Agreement, 1975 Shillong Accord, 1997 Ceasefire and 2001 Ceasefire.
Excepting the 16 Point Agreement which was represented by the Nagaland People’s Convention, there have been direct talks between GOI and the Naga U/Gs. We know all the talks have ended in failure.
In view of the present impasse, after wide consultation with all sections of people, I have suggested, that ‘Pending other political demand(s) for reconsideration at an agreed period of time –devise solution’. Some may question why pending other political demand(s)? Because we need more time to forgive the past and reconcile to live as a united family and because we are not ready to review the Plebiscite as yet. On the other hand, Govt. of India is not ready to concede. Why “agreed period of time” because reasonable time is required to develop human and natural resources. And “devise solution” that is appreciable by both sides and the neighbours. Solution should be consensus and have co-operation of all. What I mean by consensus and co-operation is to remove discriminations if any and to do justice, provide peaceful co-existence, safeguard and allow harmonial growth in the economy to all the stakeholders in the solution.
War is not the option to any political aspiration in the present century. No nation would be really willing to wage war unless the foolish decide to do so and end the world with nuclear explosions. As explained in the second paragraph, there is some structural change in the political aspiration from the original thinking; however, the door is open to settle the terms of governance. GOI cannot go back on their words. Offer of talks with no conditions from GOI cannot be without any offer. However, this solution needs to be tailor made. As stakeholders, it is our duty to lay the demands and it is the commitment of GOI to consider. There are provisions for all uniqueness in the nation, so is the uniqueness of Nagas acknowledged. Solution should be for all to live a happy life and give opportunities to pursue happiness in life.
The present requirement is Public Proposal. Such proposal should be consensus within and with neighbours. To begin, Nagaland Government and NGOs should restrain from provoking all sections of people in Nagaland and neighbours. In negotiation, force is not required; it is reasoning power that is required. Reasoning, understanding and rationalizing and not illogical, discriminative and irrational traits are expected from refined and elite leaderships.
Perhaps, we need three schemes in the present format. The fact is that Nagas have struggled together for over half a century and it will amount to betrayal if any parts of Nagas are left out in the solution. Any act of betrayal would cost dearly again as we have come across. Therefore, the following schemes are suggested:
i. Manipur Hill Areas
ii. Nagaland and
iii. Myanmar Nagas
When we talk of Myanmar Nagas GOI usually tries to evade the issue saying that we cannot intervene in the matter. We all know Myanmar is a sovereign nation and it would be improper to interfere in their domestic problems. However, the truth is social affinity of Nagas in Myanmar and India cannot be separated. We love India and Myanmar but we cannot forget Nagas who are suffering under suppression. In the matter as an argument, I have questioned few politicians and officials of India. When India and Myanmar can organize joint military operations against Naga National Forces, why cannot they talk peace? GOI may not be able to dictate terms but surely GOI can suggest peaceful solutions. I am looking forward to GOI’s help in providing basic infrastructure such as water supply, health, education, roads, power, etc. and explore natural resources so as to make them self content.
I think it is not necessary to prolong. The solution is close by. We are all aware of the problem and know our own needs. We also know the limit and the frame of solution within which the Public Proposal should be. There are temporary divisions amongst the tribes, not because of culture, customs, traditions or religion but because of mishandling of situations. The dust of temporary divisions will soon settle down once we agree to the Public Proposal. Presuming the dust will settle down, the suggestion should be proposed with patience and tolerance. The People’s will is supreme and it shall reign. Anyone defying the will of the people is a challenge to the people. It will be unfortunate. There has to be proposal from the Naga Public for negotiation.
Now it is a matter of agreeing to a working system. In my view, all the Tribal Hohos / Organizations should rise to the occasion in a united voice and resolution. No political parties or groups should interfere in the set up and functioning. Let it be independent to allow the inner truth to flow freely in the proposed solution. The Tribes may consider the safeguards that are really in need to grow into civilization with sound economic policies and programs without discriminating neighbours. When discrimination is eliminated, it is as good as consensus. The sixty MLAs and the Church are already in consultation. Tribal Delegates may coordinate with them and share the visions in formulating a Public Proposal. When proper justifications are there in the demands it is also as good as consensus. No egoistic, paternalistic or dictatorial feelings should be allowed in the Public Proposal.
K. Therie
Former Finance Minister, Nagaland.
